Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal with an 85-day delay, attributing it to his serious health condition (Acute Pancreatitis and Chronic Liver Disease) and the prolonged illness and eventual demise of his wife. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed additions made by the AO under section 43B, disallowance of a donation, and enhancement of the gross profit rate, without providing the assessee sufficient opportunities to be heard due to his aforementioned personal circumstances.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, finding the reasons provided by the assessee to be genuine. Recognizing the lack of sufficient opportunity of being heard granted by the CIT(A), the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the case back to the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, ensuring the assessee is given a proper opportunity to present his case. The assessee did not press certain grounds related to the addition u/s 43B and donation disallowance.
Key Issues
Condonation of delay in filing appeal; whether sufficient opportunity of being heard was provided by the CIT(A); validity of additions made by the Assessing Officer under section 43B and for enhancing gross profit rate.
Sections Cited
Section 143(3), Section 253(3), Section 250, Section 144B, Section 43B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, GUWAHATI BENCH, GUWAHATI
PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
In this case, the ITAT Registry has reported that there is a delay of 64 days in filing of the appeal. The delay has been requested to be condoned as under:
“The appellant has preferred an appeal in Form 36 before the Hon'ble Bench against the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals) passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. As per the provisions of section 253(3), the appeal was required to be filed on or before 11th March, 2025. However, the appeal could only be filed on 4rd June, 2025, resulting in a delay of 85 days. The reasons for the delay are detailed below: 1. That due to serious health condition, the appellant was unable to continue the required legal proceedings as he was a prolonged sufferer of Acute Pancreatitis and Chronic Liver Disease (CLD), both of which significantly compromised his New Tech Steel & Alloys Private Limited physical ability and overall well-being (medical documents related to the diagnosis have been enclosed).
That the appellant's wife, Late Neeta Sharma, had been battling a prolonged illness from Cancer for last 2 years, which required continuous medical supervision and personal care. Tragically, she passed away on 16th April 2025, which caused immense emotional distress to the appellant and necessitated his involvement in family obligations, including the performance of funeral rites and the customary mourning period. (Relevant medical documents and death certificate are enclosed).
That owing to the combined emotional trauma of losing his spouse and his own deteriorating health, the seriousness and content of the letter(s), if any, sent to his address of correspondence could not be rightfully dealt with. In view of the aforesaid, the appellant humbly prays before your honor to admit the appeal by condoning the delay in filing the appeal.” 1.1 Considering the reasons given in the said petition, we hereby condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication.
2. The present appeal arises from order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”), dated 10.01.2025, passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi.
2.1 In this case, the additions were made by the Ld. AO on account of violation of section 43B of the Act (Rs. 41,11,140/-); amount donated disallowed (Rs. 2,000/-); and addition on account of enhancing the gross profit rate (Rs. 5,62,73,922/-). Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee could not appear and file any response to as many as 7 opportunities given to him. Thereafter, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of Ld. AO.
2.2 Aggrieved with this action of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed the present appeal with the following grounds:
“1. That the order dated 10/01/2025 passed U/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is bad in law as well as on the facts of the case in upholding the order 19/04/2021 passed by the AO u/s. 143(3) read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. That the CIT(A) has passed the order u/s 250 without providing sufficient opportunity to the appellant and as such the order is bereft of natural justice is liable to be deleted in full. 2 New Tech Steel & Alloys Private Limited 3. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) erred in law as well as on the facts of the case for making an addition of Rs. 41,11,140/- u/s 43B to the total income of the appellant on account of non production of supporting documents. The same may kindly be deleted.
4. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) erred in law as well as on the facts of the case for disallowing donation made of Rs. 2,000/- and adding it back to the total income of the appellant. The same may kindly be deleted.
5. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) erred in law as well as on facts of the case for upholding the order passed by the AO and for calculating the undisclosed business gross profit at the rate of 22.2 per cent of the amount deposited in the disclosed bank account and making addition of Rs.5,62,73,922/- to the total income of the appellant. The same may kindly be deleted.
That the appellant craves leave to submit any other ground/s on or before the hearing of the appeal.”
3. Right at the outset, the Ld. AR mentioned that the assessee was not wanting to press ground Nos. 3 and 4 pertaining to the addition u/s 43B of the Act and the disallowance of donation of Rs. 2,000/-. Thereafter, the Ld. AR argued that all the facts were before the Ld. CIT(A) to arrive at a judicious decision. However, it was mentioned that the assessee could not appear or comply to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) since his wife was terminally ill.
3.1 The Ld. DR supported the orders of authorities below but stated that he had no objection in case the matter was to be remanded back to the file of Ld. CIT(A).
We have carefully considered the orders of authorities below and heard the Ld. AR/DR. It is felt that in the interests of justice, this matter deserves to be remanded back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. We are persuaded by the argument of the Ld. AR and the reasons given for seeking condonation of this appeal, regarding the terminal illness of the spouse of the assessee. Accordingly, we set aside New Tech Steel & Alloys Private Limited the impugned order and remand the same back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
In result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 21.08.2025